"It is no doubt a very generous principle in any person to rejoice in the felicities of a nation, where themselves are strangers or sojourners: But if it be found that the same persons on all other occasions express a hatred and contempt of the nation and people in general, and hold it for a maxim—'That the more such a country is humbled, the more their own will rise'; it need be no longer a secret, why such an opinion, and the advantages of it are encouraged. And besides, if the bayliff reports to his master, that the ox is fat and strong, when in reality it can hardly carry its own legs, is it not natural to think, that command will be given, for a greater load to be put upon it?" [T. S.]
[21] This was a project for the establishment of a national bank for Ireland. Swift ridiculed the proposal (see p. 31), no doubt, out of suspicion of the acts of stock-jobbers and the monied interests which were enlisted on the side of the Whigs. His experience, also, of the abortive South Sea Schemes would tend to make his opposition all the stronger. But the plans for the bank were not ill-conceived, and had Swift been in calmer temper he might have seen the advantages which attached to the proposals. [T. S.]
[22] Thus in original edition. In Faulkner and the "Miscellanies" of 1735 the words are, "altogether imaginary." [T. S.]
[23] The motto round a crown piece, which was the usual price of permits. [Orig. edit.]
[24] The Dean of St. Patrick's. [F.]
[25] Paul Lorrain, who was appointed ordinary of Newgate in 1698, compiled numerous confessions and dying speeches of prisoners condemned to be hanged. A letter to Swift, from Pope and Bolingbroke, dated December, 1725, mentions him as "the great historiographer," and Steele, in the "Tatler" and "Spectator," refers to "Lorrain's Saints." Lorrain attended some famous criminals to the scaffold, including Captain Kidd and Jack Sheppard. [T. S.]
[26] The following is an account of the proceedings of both the houses of the Irish parliament upon the subject of this proposed bank.
In the year 1720, James, Earl of Abercorn, Gustavus, Viscount Boyne, Sir Ralph Gore, Bart., Oliver St. George, and Michael Ward, Esqs., in behalf of themselves and others, presented a petition to his Majesty for a charter of incorporation, whereby they might be established as a bank, under the name and title of the Bank of Ireland. They proposed to raise a fund of £500,000 to supply merchants, etc., with money at five per cent., and agreed to contribute £50,000 to the service of government in consideration of their obtaining a charter. In their petition they state, that "the raising of a million for that purpose is creating a greater fund than the nation can employ." Soon after the above-mentioned petition was lodged, a second application was made by Lord Forbes and others, who proposed raising a million for that purpose, and offered to discharge "the £50,000 national debt of that kingdom, in five years from the time they should obtain a charter." The latter application, being subsequent in point of date, was withdrawn, Lord Forbes and his friends having acquainted the Lord-lieutenant that, "rather than, by a competition, obstruct a proposal of so general advantage, they were willing to desist from their application." The former was accordingly approved of, and the King, on the 29th of July, 1721, issued letters of Privy Seal, directing that a charter of incorporation should pass the Great Seal of Ireland. ("Comm. Journ.," vol. iii, Appendix ix, page cc, etc.)
When the parliament of Ireland met, on the 12th of September following, the Duke of Grafton, lord lieutenant, in his speech from the throne, communicated the intention of his Majesty to both houses, and concluded by saying, "As this is a matter of general and national concern, his Majesty leaves it to the wisdom of Parliament to consider what advantages the public may receive by erecting a bank, and in what manner it may be settled upon a safe foundation, so as to be beneficial to the kingdom." The commons, in their address, which was voted unanimously on the 14th, expressed their gratitude for his Majesty's goodness and royal favour in directing a commission to establish a bank, and on the 21st moved for the papers to be laid before them; they even, on the 29th, agreed to the following resolution of the committee they had appointed, "that the establishment of a bank upon a solid and good foundation, under proper regulations and restrictions, will contribute to restoring of credit, and support of the trade and manufacture of the kingdom;" but, when the heads of a bill for establishing the bank came to be discussed, a strenuous opposition was raised to it. On the 9th of December Sir Thomas Taylor, chairman of the committee to whom the matter had been referred, reported "that they had gone through the first enacting paragraph, and disagreed to the same." Accordingly, the question being proposed and put, the house (after a division, wherein there appeared 150 for the question and 80 against it) voted that "they could not find any safe foundation for establishing a public bank," and resolved that an address, conformable to this resolution, should be presented to the lord-lieutenant. (Comm. Journ., vol. iii, pp. 247-289.)
The proceedings of the House of Lords resembled that of the Commons; on the 8th of November they concurred with the resolution of their committee, which was unfavourable to the establishment of a bank. A protest was, however, entered, signed by four temporal and two spiritual peers, and when an address to his Majesty, grounded on that resolution, was proposed, a long debate ensued, which occupied two days. On the 9th December a list of the subscriptions was called for, and on the 16th they resolved, that if any lord, spiritual or temporal, should attempt to obtain a charter to erect a bank, "he should be deemed a contemnor of the authority of that house, and a betrayer of the liberty of his country." They ordered, likewise, that this resolution should be presented by the chancellor to the lord lieutenant. ("Lord's Journal," vol. ii, pp. 687-720.) Monck Mason's "Hist. St. Patrick's Cathedral," p. 325, note 3. [T. S.]